Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot successfully thwarted the visit of author Salman Rushdie to Jaipur Literature Festival between January 20 and 24 and his video conferencing. Central agencies were asked to ensure all help to him to keep the writer away, in person or through virtual telecast after he met union home minister P. Chidambaram in New Delhi on January 18. A massive threat perception to author and the venue was manufactured, Congress minded representatives at the festival were roped in and organisers were given ultimate warning about losing Jaipur as venue for ever. Paikar Farooq, leader of Muslim Forum told media on January 24 a little before live telecast of Rushdie was prevented: "Jaipur police commissioner BL Soni has told us that he has told organisers that if video conferencing takes place then it would be the last literature festival in Jaipur."

The police never assured organisers or Rushdie about security and always conveyed an extremely exaggerated likelihood of threat with a constant stand: "Rushdie is not greater than festival. If anything went wrong, which is very likely to happen, then we will not be responsible for the fall out." This attitude was in total contrast with state police providing full security to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi who carried far more serious threat then Rushdie, during his two visits to Jaipur on January 17 and January 9. Police always spoke about definite information about those planning to disrupt the festival if Rushdie's voice was heard there but it did not make a single preventive arrest. Why Gehlot wanted to stop Rushdie?

Gehlot had backing of Congress High Command to use it an opportunity to showcase himself as a caretaker of Muslim interests. The party had found itself in extremely precarious situation after his police killed ten Meos in Gopalgarh town which borders Uttar Pradesh in September. There were half a dozen more communal incidents in the state around this time where Muslims were at receiving end and Quran was burnt in an Ajmer town. State intelligence had told Gehlot that posters describing him as "Ashok Modi of Gopala-Garh" had appeared in bordering places in Uttar Pradesh equating him with Gujrat Chief Minister Narendra Modi's Godhra. Gehlot was also afraid that any scuffle with howsoever small a number of protesters could snowball into bigger issue as it happened in Gopalgarh. They decided to use invitation to Rushdie for the festival as just the right issue to refurbish this sullen image even if that meant projecting a handful of Muslims as violent threat to thousands attending the festival.

Gehlot's strategyGehlot picked up a memorandum from an inconsequential and unheard group which called itself as Muslim Ekta Forum. He tagged it with a letter from Darul Uloom of Deoband which had asked centre to keep Rushdie away from the festival this time, but had ignored it when he had attended it in 2007. Without any permission from the party high command, BJP's state minority cell which had as negligible presence as the Forum, too demanded that Rushdie be kept away. Gehlot decided to give momentum to these handful Muslims, none of them had anything at stake. I run up to the festival, he repeatedly said that there could be a major law and order problem in view of such sentiments. Mushir-ul-Haan from faculty if Rajasthan University said there were not more than 50-100 protesters in entire Jaipur. "Who instigated them? We need to know." he said during a debate after Rushdie's video conferencing was cancelled on January 24. Gehlot knew that liberals would be upset and coming openly in supported of banning the visit could damage his own image, he chose to create confusion. He on one hand claimed that he was conveying protesters' views to the centre. Simultaneously, he kept saying that he and his government were in no way involved in scuttling his visit. Or even aware about it officially.

Bluff called offThe bluff of his and his government in dark about the visit was called off when Rushdie on January 20 said that he was forced to cancel his visit after intelligence inputs about two hired assassins leaving Mumbai to kill him. Intelligence Bureau pulled out an input that in June , 2011 a man with two arms was detained somewhere in Maharashtra suspecting him to be hunting for Rushdie and circulated it afresh. But once Soni and Maharashtra Police denied any such immediate threat or happening, Rushdie and media termed the threat a lie. That forced Gehlot and his home secretary GS Sandhu on January 23 to admit that they were aware about the visit officially and have been sounding organisers and Rushdie about threat perception.

Admission"Yes, we succeeded in implementing the mandate to keep Rushdie away," a very senior police officer involved in implementing keep Rushdie away plan confided to India Today: "We also were prepared for the criticism that English media would make." State Congress spokesperson Satyendra Raghav for the first time made party's stand official on January 24: "Yes, Congress never wanted that Rushdie should come."

ConnivanceThe police actions were entirely focused in assisting protesters. This attitude was in total contrast with state police providing full security to Modi, who carried far more serious threat then Rushdie, during his two visits to Jaipur on January 17 and January 9. Or when it made security arrangements for US talk show celebrity Winfrey Oprah who faced no terror threat on January 22. It closed the doors of venue more than one hours before her session was to take place. Two thousand pass holders were stopped two hundred meters away from the venue with even children not allowed for full two hours even when there was space to accommodate them at the venue. Armed company of state police was deployed to ensure that Oprah could leave conveniently.

In contrast, same police had told organisers to make four authors who broke no law when the read pout excerpts from Satanic Verses without possessing the banned book, leave Jaipur to evade arrest or a violent fall out.

On January 24, despite local media full of protesters' statements that they would enter Diggi House, the venue of festival to disrupt video conferencing, the police let about fifty of them-clearly identifiable as protesters- enter even when they carried no passes. The same police had told organisers on January 20 to stop issuing fresh passes in view of uncontrollable crowd. The organisers were told register the protesters as visitors. Some of them then offered namaz at the venue.

Simultaneously, police told organisers that they could go ahead with the video conferencing by ensuring that it did not violate any law during discussions etc. This was a strategy to make organisers not stop entry of protesters. But one hour before Rushdie's proposed video conferencing was to begun, police sealed the entire area. It even stopped buses full of school students who wanted to visit the festival, a kilometer before the venue. A few minutes before organisers called off the video conferencing, police had told its unarmed men to encircle the front lawns to make threat strong enough to make organisers surrender. They did so abjectly by cancelling the video conferencing.

SurrenderThe owner of Diggi Palace Ram Pratap Singh who has got the fame for himself and for the venue through the festival, chose to sing what government wanted. Without any expression of regret or sadness, he declared that it was he who was refusing permission for video conferencing since police won't be able to control the protesters who were already inside. Sanjoy Roy, the main organiser's voice broke making him leave his statement regarding cancellation halfway after he claimed to have been bullied and pushed to corner. He did not tell India Today who did it: polie or the protesters. Faith Singh, founder of the festival declined to comment either.

A debate on the cancellation followed on dais. It did mention about humiliation that organises were subjected too but did not say by whom. It did not question government failure in providing them security. It organised to bail out organisers. So it said it was a wake up call. It also concluded that the festival was not a battle ground to settle the grey area in constitution that gave elected representatives to take a call on when to take a call on freedom of expression. And as Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh said: "About Rushdie's visit, Chief Minister of Rajasthan had to take a call." Organisers or participants did not mention Gehlot. They did not take questions, like the organisers. Gehlot's success will be sold in Uttar Pradesh elections as someone who did not let Rushdie enter his state, something which even Indian government could not do. After all, Rushdie has been to India several times with governments giving him full security. Gehlot succeeded in not letting him by projecting all Muslims capable of getting dangerously violent. "I feel embarrassed about the cancellation of video conferencing," Hassan said. People Union for Civil Liberties has also indicted Gehlot government for doing it deliberately.

Whether Gehlot's administration projecting Muslims as violent community would cost Congress votes or will BJP gain Hindu votes in UP assembly, needs to be seen.